Many companies package groups of items together for a variety of purposes, such as e-commerce and mail order companies that package items (e.g., books, CDs, apparel, food, etc.) to be shipped to fulfill orders from customers. Retailers, wholesalers, and other product distributors (which may collectively be referred to as distributors) typically maintain an inventory of various items that may be ordered by clients or customers. This inventory may be maintained and processed at a materials handling facility which may include, but is not limited to, one or more of: warehouses, distribution centers, cross-docking facilities, order fulfillment facilities, packaging facilities, shipping facilities, or other facilities or combinations of facilities for performing one or more functions of material (inventory) handling.
A common concern with such groups of items, referred to herein as “item packages,” involves ensuring that appropriate containers are used for shipping them, both to minimize costs and to protect the item contents. An agent may select a container based on a visual assessment of the items once they are grouped. Using this method, the agent may not be able to select an appropriate container until all of the items in the group have been collected. This visual method of selecting containers may be prone to human error, as an agent may select a container that is too small or that is larger than it needs to be to handle the items. This may result in higher costs associated with using an inappropriate container or in additional costs associated with re-work, in the case that an agent must re-package the items and/or split the group of items into two or more containers for shipping. For example, shipping a group of items in a box that is larger than necessary may result in a higher shipping cost than shipping the same items in a smaller box, due to the cost of the box and/or any higher fees associated with shipping larger or heavier boxes. Similarly, shipping items in a box that is larger than necessary, or not filling each box to capacity, may waste valuable (and expensive) transportation space (e.g., space in a truck or in a shipping container that will be placed on a train or an airplane). In another example, attempting to pack too many items in a box that is too small for the items may damage the item and/or may result in re-work if some of the items must be taken out of one box and re-packaged in another box, splitting the item group into two or more smaller item groups to be shipped in separate boxes. In addition, manually singling out item groups for repacking or other exception handling may increase labor costs and decrease cycle time for fulfilling customer orders. The excess costs associated with shipping item packages in inappropriate containers, and/or with exception processing and re-work may significantly reduce profit margins in some materials handling facilities.
Shipments that include large quantities of items and/or unusually large items can be difficult for a materials handling facility to process. They are often treated as exceptions because of their volume and the time needed to process them, e.g., manually splitting them into separate groupings for shipping if there are no boxes large enough to contain the entire order. The impact of these large shipments on the efficiency of the facility is considerable. Moreover, during peak periods, the impact of such shipments is even greater.
While embodiments described herein by way of example for several embodiments and illustrative drawings, those skilled in the art will recognize that the embodiments not limited to the embodiments or drawings described. It should be understood, that the drawings and detailed description thereto are not intended to limit embodiments to the particular form disclosed, but on the contrary, the intention is to cover all modifications, equivalents and alternatives falling within the spirit and scope as defined by the appended claims. The headings used herein are for organizational purposes only and are not meant to be used to limit the scope of the description or the claims. As used throughout this application, the word “may” is used in a permissive sense (i.e., meaning having the potential to), rather than the mandatory sense (i.e., meaning must). Similarly, the words “include,” “including,” and “includes” mean including, but not limited to.